Researching eighteenth-century fraud in the Old Bailey: reflections on court records, archives, and digitisation

Cerian Charlotte Griffiths

doi:10.18778/0208-6069.91.02

Autor

Cerian Charlotte Griffiths Lancaster University Law School https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8629-434X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.91.02

Słowa kluczowe:

Oszustwo, Old Bailey, digitalizacja, historia prawa, metodologia

Abstrakt

Artykuł ma na celu przedstawienie spostrzeżeń i wskazówek pomocnych badaczom zajmującym się przestępstwem oszustwa w Wielkiej Brytanii w osiemnastym i dziewiętnastym stuleciu. Spostrzeżenia te wyjaśniają przyczyny, dla których brakuje historycznych badań nad przestępstwem oszustwa. Są one tak ontologiczne, jak i metodologiczne. Definicje praw dotyczących oszustwa są złożone i trudne do zidentyfikowania, zaś jedno z najbardziej dostępnych archiwów, Akta Sesyjne Old Bailey (Sprawozdania), muszą być wykorzystywane przez badaczy z ostrożnością. W artykule wskazano historyczne okoliczności powstania Sprawozdań i zastosowano tę wiedzę do badań nad przestępstwem oszustwa, które w świetle powyższych ustaleń, wymagają wyjątkowego podejścia metodologicznego.

Pobrania

Brak dostępnych danych do wyświetlenia.

Bibliografia

Archer, Dawn. 2014. “Historical Pragmatics: Evidence from the Old Bailey”. Transactions of the Philological Society 112 (2): 259–277.
Google Scholar

Beale, Joseph H. 1892. “The Borderland of Larceny”. Harvard Law Review 6 (5): 244–256.
Google Scholar

Bradley, John. Harold Short. 2005. “Texts into databases: the evolving field of new-style prosopography”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 20 (1): 3–24.
Google Scholar

Devereaux, Simon. 1996. “The City and the Sessions Paper: “Public Justice” in London 1770–1800”. Journal of British Studies 35 (4): 466–503.
Google Scholar

Devereaux, Simon. 2007. “From Sessions to Newspaper? Criminal Trial Reporting, the Nature of Crime, and the London Press, 1770–1800”. The London Journal 32 (1): 1–27.
Google Scholar

Eiseman, Jason et al. 2016. “Litchfield Unbound: Unlocking Legal History with Metadata, Digitization, and Digital Tools”. Law and History Review 34 (4): 831–855.
Google Scholar

Foreman-Peck, James. 1995. “Sleaze and the Victorian Businessman”. History Today 45 (8): 5–8.
Google Scholar

Gallanis, Thomas P. 2006. “The Mystery of Old Bailey Counsel”. Cambridge Law Journal 65 (1): 159–173.
Google Scholar

Griffiths, Cerian Charlotte. 2014. “The Prisoners’ Counsels Act 1836: Doctrine, Advocacy and the Criminal Trial”. Law, Crime and History 2: 28–47.
Google Scholar

Griffiths, Cerian Charlotte. 2017. Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760–1820. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
Google Scholar

Hay, Douglas. 2006. “Writing about the Death Penalty”. Legal History 10: 35–51.
Google Scholar

Hitchcock, Tim. Robert Shoemaker. 2006. “Digitising History from Below: The Old Bailey Proceedings Online, 1674–1834”. History Compass 4 (2): 193–202.
Google Scholar

Hitchcock, Tim. Robert Shoemaker. James Winters. 2011. “Connected histories: a new web search tool for British historian”. The Journal of the Historical Association 96: 354–356.
Google Scholar

Innes, Joanna. John Styles. 1986. “The Crime Wave: Recent Writing on Crime and Criminal Justice in Eighteenth-Century England”. Journal of British Studies 25 (4): 380–435.
Google Scholar

Ireland, Richard. 2015. “Why everything we know about criminal justice history is wrong”. Law, Crime and History 5 (1): 130–142.
Google Scholar

King, Peter. 2009. “Making Crime News: newspapers, violent crime and the selective reporting of the Old Bailey trials in the late eighteenth century”. Crime, History and Society 13 (1): 91–116.
Google Scholar

Langbein, John. 1978. “The Criminal Trial before the Lawyers”. The University of Chicago Law Review 45 (2): 263–316.
Google Scholar

Langbein, John H. 1999. “The prosecutorial origins of defence counsel in the eighteenth century: the appearance of solicitors”. Cambridge Law Journal 58 (2): 314–365.
Google Scholar

Levi, Michael. 1987. Regulating fraud: white-collar crime and the criminal process. London and New York: Tavistock Publications.
Google Scholar

McGowen, Randall. 2007. “Managing the Gallows: The Bank of England and the Death Penalty, 1797–1821”. Law and History Review 25 (2): 241–282.
Google Scholar

Moretti, Franco. 2005. Graphs, Trees and Maps: Abstract Models for Literary History. London and New York: Verso.
Google Scholar

Proceedings of the Central Criminal Court 1834–1913. Welcome to the CC project Wiki! http: //crimpleb.group.shef.ac.uk/wiki/pmwiki.php.
Google Scholar

Robb, George. 1992. White-Collar Crime in Modern England. Financial Fraud and Business Morality, 1845–1929. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Robertson, Stephen. 2016. “Searching for Anglo-American Digital Legal History”. Law and History Review 34 (4): 1047–1069.
Google Scholar

Shoemaker, Robert B. 1993. “Using Quarter Sessions Records as Evidence for the Study of Crime and Criminal Justice”. Archives 20 (90), 145–157.
Google Scholar

Shoemaker, Robert B. 2008. “The Old Bailey Proceedings and the Representation of Crime and Criminal Justice in Eighteenth-Century London”. Journal of British Studies 47: 559–580.
Google Scholar

Sindall, Rob. 1983. “Middle Class Crime in Nineteenth-Century England”. Criminal Justice History 4: 23–40.
Google Scholar

Taylor, James. 2006. “Creating Capitalism: Joint-stock enterprise in British politics and culture, 1800–1870”. The Royal Historical Society.
Google Scholar

Tomasic, Roman. 2011. “The financial crisis and the haphazard pursuit of financial crime”. Journal of Financial Crime 18 (1): 7–31.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Sarah. 2006. “Law, Morality and Regulation: Victorian Experience of Financial Crime”. British Journal of Criminology 46 (6): 1073–1090.
Google Scholar